Join Our Newsletter List Your Organisation Here
Login
Register now to list your organisation
Please provide a correct email address.
Password must be at least 10 characters containing upper-case, lower-case and numeric characters.
Password confirmation doesn't match the original password.
Back to Insights

Financial cost of inaction projected to reach $38 trillion annually by 2050

CDP: Disclosure is no longer just a transparency exercise – it's becoming an economic imperative.

Published investESG on 2025-08-21
Photo credit: Getty Images / Unsplash+
Companies stand to gain up to 21 times return for every dollar invested in physical climate risk mitigation, according to new data-driven analysis from CDP, the global independent environmental disclosure platform.  
As climate-related disasters intensify, the financial cost of inaction is rising – projected to reach $38 trillion annually by 2050. Against this backdrop, the economics of disclosure are clear: companies that measure and manage environmental risks are better positioned to unlock the ‘disclosure dividend’ – reaping tangible financial returns from climate action. 
Drawing on analysis from disclosures of nearly 25,000 companies in 2024, CDP’s new report, The 2025 Disclosure Dividend, reveals that every $1 spent on addressing physical climate risks could deliver a return of up to $21 for some firms, with an average return of up to $81. The study also found that a median $33.1 million worth of opportunities per company could await firms that take environmental action, for just $4.6 million in costs to realize them. 
Disclosure remains a critical enabler helping businesses surface material risks and chart credible action. The vast majority (90%) of large companies disclosing to CDP already have a process for identifying and assessing their environmental dependencies, impacts, risks and opportunities or intend to do so within the next two years – and close to half (43%) of large corporates reported having a climate transition plan in place.
Yet the multiplier effect comes from taking swift action on the insight. Almost two-thirds of companies (64%) identified environmental opportunities – and of those, 12% unlocked a staggering $4.4 trillion in opportunity value in 2024 alone. The quantified opportunities yet to be realised represent another $13.2 trillion in potential upside. 
Companies in Japan and Canada are identifying the largest environmental-related financial opportunities. Based on median values, Japanese firms identified $73 million in potential gains per company, followed closely by Canada at $72 million. Those in the USA identified just $15 million worth of opportunities, while Chinese firms perceived $10 million worth of gains. 
While the disclosed value of opportunities varies greatly and may be influenced by factors such as thresholds used to define a substantive opportunity, methodological choices, and commercial sensitivity, the analysis confirms that companies in nearly all sectors and regions stand to benefit from acting on environmental opportunities.
“The economics behind disclosure are becoming clear – data driven decisions help to manage business risk and unlock opportunity” said Sherry Madera, CEO of CDP. 
“Disclosure is the foundation of action. Our data shows that companies that measure and manage their environmental impacts not only future-proof their operations but also unlock tangible financial and strategic gains. The disclosure dividend is real – and the business case for seizing it has never been stronger.” 
The report highlights a growing shift: disclosure is no longer just a transparency exercise – it's becoming an economic imperative. As the financial case for climate action strengthens, companies that act on their disclosure data stand to unlock measurable returns. The dividend lies not simply in awareness, but in translating insight into impact. The median benefit-cost ratio is based on companies’ self-reported estimates of the potential financial impact of physical climate risks over medium and long-term horizons (whichever is higher), and the associated response costs. Figures vary widely across companies within the same industry, likely due to differences in geography, size, risk exposure, and methodologies.